JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTIC STUDIES
ISSN: 1305-578XJournal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 12(1), 55-62; 2016
Academic Self-Efficacy and Prospective ELT Teachers’ Achievement
*Arif Sarıçoban a **, Bahram Mohammadi Behjoo b
a Hacettepe University, Ankara,06800, Turkey b Hacettepe University, Ankara,06800, Turkey
APA Citation:
Sarıçoban,,A. & Mohammadi Behjoo,B.(2016). Academic self-efficacy and prospective ELT teachers’ achievement. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 12(1), 55-62.
Abstract
This study aims to scrutinize the possible relationship between academic self-efficacy beliefs and foreign language achievement among prospective ELT teachers. To do so, the data for the study were collected through a questionnaire, College Academic Self-Efficacy Scale adapted from Owen & Froman (1988), consisting of 33 items measuring male and female ELT students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Beliefs as a whole. The scale is a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘very little’ (1) ‘quite a lot’ (5). The reliability was found r= .827. In this study it has been observed that there is statistically a significant relationship between academic self-efficacybeliefs and prospective ELT teachers’ achievement among male and female groups.
© 2015 JLLS and the Authors - Published by JLLS.
Keywords: Academic self-efficacy, foreign language achievement, prospective ELT teachers
1.
Introduction
With the population growth in the ever-changing world, the number of young people who continue their undergraduate studies and teacher training after the end of compulsory schooling at the age of 18 has increased as well. This is important not only for the supply of educated and trained labor for the economical and industrial development of the societies, but also for the future and well-being of the young people concerned (Payne, 2003). Within the schooling period student’s beliefs of him/herself is the key issue to have control and personal efficacy, consequently this affects learner’s academic self-efficacy (ASE) that is the level of confidence a student possesses to successfully perform particular academic tasks. Lent, Brown & Gore (1997) believe that developing cognitive skills causes to improve students’ intellectual performance and on the other hand his or her perceived self-efficacy, which increases ASE.
Bandura (1997) stated that academic achievement is heavily affected by feelings of self-efficacy. Factors such as “level of cognitive ability, prior education preparation, attainment, gender, and attitudes towards academic activities”, along with the level of perceived self-efficacy, influence academic achievement (p. 216). Developing short term goals helps students in a more rapid development of ASE. Students work more eagerly at accomplishing tasks when the goals are short term, instead of establishing long term goals that allow students to postpone difficult tasks until a later
* This article is an extended version of the paper presented in November 15/17,2012, 19 Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey and it relies on
the findings obtained in the M.A. thesis by Mohammadi Bahjoo.
**Corresponding author. Tel.: 0532 327 78 55
time. Bandura (1997) believes that using benchmarking methods and incentives to encourage students to set short time goals will help them develop ASE.
Zimmerman, Bandura, and Martinez-Pons (1992) found that there is a strong relationship between students’ current ASE and future goal setting with previous grade attainment, but only when parental expectation of academic achievement was high for their respective students. Parents’ goals for their children’s academic achievement tended to be higher than the goals students set for themselves. Parental expectations were asserted to influence the type of academic expectations the students set for themselves. These students relied on their ASE and parental expectations in order to formulate and solidify goals for the future. To support this we can rely on some research findings obtained by Chemers, Hu, & Garcia (2001), Lent, Brown, & Larkin (1984), Mone, Baker, and Jeffries (1995), and Chemers et al. (2001) who reported that academic expectations were highly related to academic achievement.
There is a strong consensus between researchers about the factors that are highly effective in determining students’ academic achievements. For example, Bandura and Schunk (1981) demonstrated that students with a strong sense of academic self-efficacy assume more challenging tasks; therefore, they expend greater effort accomplishing a given task (Pajares and Graham 1999). Lent et al. (1986) also believe that students persist longer in the face of difficulties, and according to Pintrich and De Groot (1990) learners engage in more effective self-regulatory strategies, process the learning material more deeply (Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons 1990), have higher academic aspirations (Zimmerman et al. 1992), are more mastery goal oriented (Skaalvik and Skaalvik 2005), and report lower levels of anxiety than students with little confidence in their academic abilities (Pajares and Miller 1994). As a result, Pintrich and Schunk (1996) found out that academic self-efficacy is a strong predictor of academic performance, even when the possible effects of prior knowledge and general cognitive skills are controlled for.
The ultimate purpose of this study is to determine if there is a correlation among ASE and foreign languageacademic achievement (FLA). Examining feelings of efficacy is important because the data may provide academic advisors and counselors at universities with information on domain-specific confidence levels of prospective ELT students. This knowledge can provide administrators with the foundation for the development of new programs to help ELT students gain more confidence or efficacy in foreign language achievement.
1.1.
Research questions
This study aims to examine the correlation between ASE and FLA achievement among prospective ELT students. To do this the study addressed the following research questions:
1. What are the academic self-efficacy beliefs of the prospective ELT students?
2. Is there any statistically significant difference among the ASE beliefs in terms of gender? 3. Does academic self-efficacy have any significant role in FLA?
2.
Method
2.1.
Sample / Participants& Instrument(s)
A total of 100 male and female ELT freshman students at Hacettepe University in Ankara/Turkey enrolled in this study. The data for the study were collected through a questionnaire, College Academic Self-Efficacy Scale adapted from Owen & Froman (1988), consisting of 33 items measuring male and female ELT students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Beliefs as a whole. This scale is a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘very little’ (1) to ‘quite a lot’ (5). The internal consistency reliability coefficient, determined by the Cronbach’s alpha value, for all items of the questionnaire was 0.827. The participants’ academic achievement, based on their GPA in the previous semester, was used as the dependent variable. SPSS version 17.0 for Windows is used to obtain descriptive statistics in frequencies, percentages, and mean scores. FLA is assumed as a dependent variable and ASE Belief as an independent one.
2.2.
Data collection procedures &Data analysis
As to the analysis of the results obtained in this study, the research questions have been analyzed as follows:
What are the academic self-efficacy beliefs of the prospective ELT students?
Table 1. Academic Self-Efficacy beliefs of prospective ELT students
Items N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
AS1 100 1 5 3.3000 1.04929
AS2 100 1 5 3.2200 1.02079
AS3 100 1 5 3.2100 1.10367
AS4 100 1 5 3.8300 1.04500
AS5 100 1 5 3.8800 .91320
AS6 100 1 5 3.2600 1.00121
AS7 100 1 5 2.9700 .96875
AS8 100 1 5 3.7500 1.05768
AS9 100 1 5 3.2100 1.12182
AS10 100 1 5 3.7900 .87957
AS11 100 1 5 3.4500 1.08595
AS12 100 1 5 3.2200 .92747
AS13 100 1 5 3.4900 .89324
AS14 100 1 5 2.8283 1.09768
AS15 100 1 5 3.0100 1.21018
AS16 100 1 5 3.3200 .98350
AS17 100 1 5 3.7700 1.12685
AS18 100 1 5 3.5400 1.10481
AS19 100 1 5 3.5600 1.07609
AS20 100 1 5 3.6900 .99184
AS21 100 1 5 3.8400 .89578
AS22 100 1 5 3.3400 1.12115
AS23 100 1 5 3.6700 1.27964
AS24 100 1 5 3.0100 1.26726
AS25 100 1 5 2.9200 1.33091
AS26 100 1 5 3.3100 .95023
AS28 100 1 5 2.9900 1.17632
AS29 100 1 5 3.3400 1.37231
AS30 100 1 5 3.5200 .98964
AS31 100 1 5 3.1900 .98160
AS32 100 1 5 3.2828 1.02061
AS33 100 1 5 3.1700 1.29533
As a result of the analysis of Table 1, it has been observed that the subjects of the study reported that they most frequently use 4. Answering a question in a small class (M=3.83). 5. Taking “objective” test (multiple choice, T-F, matching) (M=3.88). 8. Listening carefully during lecture on a difficult topic (M=3.75). 10. Explaining a concept to another student (M=3.79). 17. Attending class regularly (M=3.77). 18. Attending class consistently in dull courses (M=3.54). 19. Making a professor think you‘re paying attention in class (M=3.56). 20. Understanding most ideas you read in your test (M=3.69). 21. Understanding most ideas presenting in class (M=3.84). 30. Getting good grades (M=3.54) strategies to boost their academic self-efficacy beliefs.
Is there any statistically significant difference among the academic self-efficacy beliefs in terms of gender?
Table 2. Group Statistics for All Items of ASE
Items Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean AS1 male 23 2.8696 1.05763 .22053
female 76 3.4211 1.02324 .11737
AS13 male 23 3.0870 1.12464 .23450
female 76 3.6053 .78450 .08999
AS17 male 23 4.3478 .64728 .13497
female 76 3.6316 1.15288 .13224
AS19 male 23 4.0000 .90453 .18861
female 76 3.4605 1.06384 .12203
The findings given in Table 2 below regarding the difference among the academic self-efficacy beliefs in terms of gender revealed that there were statistically significant differences between male and female scores in item 1 “ taking well-organized notes during a lecture” , (M = 2.86, SD = 1.05 in males and M = 3.42, SD = 1.02 in females), t= -2.25, p = 0.027, p < 0.05, item 13 “studying enough to understand content thoroughly” , (M = 3.08, SD = 1.12 in males and M = 3.60, SD = .78 in females), t = -2.50, p = 0.014, p < 0.05, item 17 “attending class regularly” , (M = 4.34, SD = .64 in males and M = 3.63, SD = 1.15 in females), t= 2.84, p = 0.005, p < 0.05, item 19 “making a professor think you‘re paying attention in class” , (M = 4, SD = .90 in males and M = 3.46, SD = 1.06 in females), t= 2.20, p = 0.030, p < 0.05 (see table 2). However, no significant difference was found among groups in relation to the other remaining items.
Does academic self-efficacy have any significant role in foreign language achievement?
Table 3. Correlation between ASE and FLA
ASE
FLA
N R Sig. (2-tailed)
100 .60** 0.000
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Is there any statistically significant difference between the academic self-efficacy and foreign language achievement in terms of gender?
The results, as determined by Pearson Correlation, also demonstrated that there is a significant positive correlation between the ASE of males, r = .70, P< 0.01 and females, r= .58, P < 0.01. The careful scrutiny of the results, however, revealed that males did better than females in the study because the higher scores were ascribed to males while females received lower scores. This means that, despite of the differences in degrees of correlation between variables, as the degree of ASE increases, the degree of FLA tends to increase as well (Table 4).
Table 4. Correlation between ASE and FLA with special reference to Gender
ASE
FLA
Males Females
r N Sig.(2-tailed) R N Sig.(2-tailed)
.70** 24 0.000 .58** 76 0.000
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
3.
Discussion and Conclusions
The present study was designed to explore “The Correlation between Academic Self-Efficacy and Foreign Language Achievement among prospective ELT” teachers at Hacettepe University, Ankara/Turkey. The research questions for this study were formulated from the conceptual framework of the study.
According to the findings of prominent researchers such as Pajares (1996) and Pintrich & Schunk, (2002), academic self-efficacy has been linked to a diversity of achievement-related outcomes, including grade point average (GPA), standardized test scores, persistence on difficult tasks, and enrolment in challenging courses. And the link between academic self-efficacy and academic performance can be considered as “reasonably secured”, to borrow Pajares’s (1996, p.563) words, if findings across different age groups and academic subjects tend to be robust.
Lorsbach and Jinks (1999) and Schunk (1991) state that academic self-efficacy indicates an individual’s confidence to execute academic tasks successfully at selected level drawing upon his or her abilities, attitudes, and previous experiences. (Pajares (1996) and Schunk (1991) believe that individuals with high academic self-efficacy tend to approach difficult tasks and activities while learners with low academic self-efficacy tend to give up on a learning process when early efforts do not result in perceived or actual success (Schunk, 1984). Similarly Lorsbach & Jinks (1999) argue that low academic self-efficacy can result in less academic engagement, which could give rise to lower success, further decrease in academic self-efficacy.
well. This study also examined the correlation between ASE and FLA in terms of gender. The findings showed that FLA varies according to gender, with males scoring higher than females.
The results obtained in this study revealed that there is a significant positive correlation between the ASE for males (70%) and females (58%). The findings, as mentioned earlier, indicated that males did better than females in the study because the higher scores were ascribed to males while females received lower scores. This means that, despite the differences in degrees of correlation between variables, as the degree of ASE increases, the degree of FLA tends to increase as well.
There are studies that directly and indirectly support the findings of this research. Studies on the subject reported that ASE promotes academic achievement directly by increasing academic aspirations and pro-social behaviour (Bandura, Caprara, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli, 1996). It has also demonstrated that students whose self-efficacy is stronger and more accurate in their mathematics computation, show greater persistence on difficult items than do students with low self-efficacy (Collins, 1982).
In conclusion, according to the findings of previous researches, there has been a link between the ASE and learner’s FLA. This implies that education officials and curriculum designers must pay more attention to plan appropriate programs depending on learner’s cognitive and psychological demands. This will serve as an important factor in drawing learner’s attention to course materials. As stated earlier, one of the significant factors which are closely related to academic self-efficacy is the achievement motivation of the learners that creates extra power to achieve their academic objectives. Due to high academic self-efficacy, learners can concentrate enthusiastically on their teacher. Moreover, the perseverance will be enjoyable and they will eagerly do their homework, feel good because of having intimate relationship with their teachers and do their best to satisfy them by understanding and benefiting from the learning activities and materials. Last but not the least, social accomplishments and parental satisfaction become important for them.
All mentioned above confirm the correlation between ASE and FLA to improve and promote learner’s performance level in educational environments. They also emphasize on the educational curriculum designers, educational councilors and parents to take learner’s personality components along with their other academic capabilities into account. Besides, the quality of self-efficacy differs in different stages of growth and development. Therefore, familiarity of educational officials with the fundamentals of developmental psychology in ASE domain is necessary and predicting it is considered one of the basic principles of educational planning.
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-esteem: the Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman.
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67, 1206-1222.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 41(3), 586-598. Chemers, M. M., Hu, L., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self- efficacy and first-year college student
performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 55-64.
Collins, J.L. (1982). Self-efficacy and ability in achievement behaviour. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1984). Relation of self-efficacy expectations to academic achievement and persistence. Journal of Counseling Psychology,31(3), 356-362.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1986). Self-efficacy in the prediction of academic performance and perceived career options. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33, 165-169. Lorsbach, A. W. & Jinks, J. L. (1999). Self-Efficacy Theory and Learning Environment Research.
Learning Environments Research, 2, 157-167.
Mone, M. A., Baker, D. D. and Jeffries, F. (1995) Predictive validity and time dependency of selfefficacy, self-esteem, personal goals, and academic performance. Educational and Psychological Measurement 55(5), 716-727.
Pajares, (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings, Review of Educational Research 66(4) (), 543–578.
Pajares, F., & Graham, L. (1999). Self-efficacy, motivation constructs, and mathematics performance of entering middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(2), 124-139. Pajares, F. Miller, M. D. (1994). The role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in Mathematical
Problem-Solving. A path analysis . Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 193 – 203.
Payne, J. (2003). Choice at the end of compulsory schooling: A review of research. RR414. London: Department for Education and Skills.
Pintrich, P. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33e40.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Merrill.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schunk, D. (1984). Self-efficacy perspective on achievement behavior. Educational Psychologist, 19, 48–58.
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psycholigist, 26, 207-231. Skaalvik, S., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2005). Self-concept, motivational orientation, and help seeking
behavior in mathematics: A study of adults returning to high school. Social Psychology of Education, 8, 285–302.
Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-Motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663-676.
Akademik Öz Yeterlik ve Aday İngilizce Öğretmenlerinin Başarısı
Öz
Bu çalışma, aday İngilizce öğretmenlerinin akademik öz yeterlik inançları ile dil başarıları arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Veriler, İngiliz Dili Eğitimi bölümünde eğitim gören öğrencilerden toplanmıştır. Çalışmada, Owen ve Froman (1988) tarafından geliştirilen akademik öz yeterlik ölçeğinden uyarlanan ve 33 maddeden oluşan beşli Likert ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Güvenilirlik r= .827 bulunmuştur. Bu çalışma, aday İngilizce öğretmenlerinin akademik öz yeterlik inançları ile başarıları arasında belirgin bir ilişki olduğunu göstermiştir. Anahtar sözcükler: Akademik öz yeterlik, yabancı dil başarısı, aday İngilizce öğretmenleri
AUTHOR BIODATA
Dr.Arif SARIÇOBAN has been working as an associate professor of ELT at Hacettepe University since 1997 and acting as an editor-in-chief, an editor, and a reviewer for various national and international journals in the field of Language and Linguistic Studies. He has numerous national and international articles and also presented numerous papers at both national and international conferences. His main focus of interest is EFL, ESL, TEFL, ELT and recently the Teaching of Turkish as a Native Language (TNL) and the teaching of Turkish as a Foreign and/or Second Language (TFL/TSL). He has so far authored various ELT course books. He has recently acted as an editor on Instructional Technologies and Materials Design in which he also has two joint book chapters on the development and use of technology and another book on linguistics in ELT studies. He has many other book chapters in both national and international ELT course books.
